A Guide to Writing (Pokémon Fanfiction)
by Zion of Arcadia
Summary: An in-depth discussion of writing and narrative using Pokémon as a framing device. Designed for new and old authors alike. By the end I'll have drafted a concept for some Pokémon fanfiction.
1. Intro and Point of View

A/N: Ho boy. I just had a vision of myself, working on this instead of my fanfiction. Long story short, about a year ago I joined a discord server for PMD, and ever since I've really gotten involved in the fandom, the most involved I've been in years. We share a lot of writing advice, and it got me thinking. When I was younger I was a big fan of stuff like _Canon Rape_ (in retrospect that title makes me cringe, lol) and _Clichestorm._ You know, tongue-in-cheek parodies that were also intended to inform burgeoning authors.

But as I grew older and learned more about writing, I sort of realized that these stories don't really get at the root of the problems they parody and/or mock, but were rather a byproduct of more systematic issues (some of which lays at the feet of the source material, but that's a discussion for another day).

It's no secret that most fanfiction isn't very good. I attribute this to a variety of reasons. Lack of experience, lack of talent, lack of mentoring, lack of editing, lack of filtering, lack of drive. But one thing fanfiction does have in spades is passion. People write about fandoms because, well, because they care. They love Naruto, they love Harry Potter, they love Pokémon. And they're inspired to creatively express that love through smut, err, I mean stories.

This opens up avenues to people who otherwise may have never started writing. It provides a place to share ideas, to foster community and support and growth. And I think that's pretty neat.

So I want to give back with a little guide of my own, that comprehensively goes over the foundations of narrative, and apply it to Pokémon fanfiction. Because at the end of the day, fanfiction is just that, _fiction_ , and thus the same rules apply. We just get to take some shortcuts, heh.

By the end of this guide, I'll have drafted an outline for a novel-length story. Feel free to join me in working on an outline of your own, or simply follow along. If you have any requests or questions, let me know either in reviews or via PM, and I'll see if I can't discuss it in upcoming chapters. Here we go!

* * *

 **Intro**

 _"We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."_ \- Oscar Wilde

As a quick aside, I don't plan to touch on grammar much if at all. Mainly because it's boring. I recommend checking out podcasts such as Grammar Girl or sites such as Grammarly (or perhaps talk to a teacher/professor in a school setting). I'll make two quick points about grammar before moving on:

1\. Grammar exists to better facilitate communication between author and reader. Learn the rules.

2\. The best authors know when and how to break the rules of grammar to evoke a specific reaction and/or effect. But again, rules must be learned to be broken.

One of the first things I do when writing any sort of fanfiction - or fiction in general - is determine the genre. Is it a romantic comedy, fantasy adventure, science fiction, urban thriller, film-noir, family drama, etc., etc. There are a variety of categories and subcategories.

Different genres often come with different expectations from the audience. People that read romance are primarily interested in interactions between characters, while fantasy readers are often interested in world building aspects.

In ancient Greece, genres boiled down to comedies (light hearted stories often poking fun at artists, politicians, and philosophers), tragedies (serious subject matter dealing with moral rights and wrongs), and satyr, also known as tragicomedy (a tragic play with comedic elements to lighten the mood, or a serious play with a happy ending). All three fall under the umbrella of the Athenian drama.

For the purpose of this guide, I'm going to focus on writing a fantasy adventure fanfiction, with a dash of romance, since that's what's most popular in this particular fandom. It'll mostly be comedic, although I'll include some tragic undertones. I've also decided to use characters from the Pokémon anime, because interpreting canon characters is fairly unique to fanfiction. I do intend to discuss original characters as well, and character building in general, so fear not.

Misty and Gary will star as the main characters in my story. They'll both be on vacation in Alola when shenanigans occur, and boom, there's an opening premise.

One other thing to keep in mind is that even something as simple as competence isn't just going to appear out of thin air. Or, more accurately, during the first draft. Writing is a skill that, like any other, needs to be honed and practiced. The more I write the better I get.

Even the stuff I wrote about two years back makes me cringe a bit (okay, a lot), because of my constant evolution as an author. It's natural. It's normal. Rookie writers are going to make mistakes (hell, experienced writers are going to make mistakes! They're just better at hiding it, haha), and that's okay. That's how they learn and improve.

Some advice to help expedite the process. First, read a lot. People often learn best by association. It also gives ideas to steal, I mean, borrow, and improve upon or approach from another angle.

I coach soccer, and we often encourage kids to play other sports as well in the off season. The reason is that certain, specific skills are improved upon due to cross-sports play. A similar concept applies to this situation. Consume media outside of books such as movies, television, plays, games, and music - the presentation of narrative may differ, but many of the applications remain the same.

As a note of caution, not everything across mediums translates well. A picture is worth a thousand words or whatever. There's a reason adaptations are often contentious.

* * *

 **Point of View**

 _"The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it."_ \- Mark Twain

What's the first thing that should be decided when writing any story? Plot? Characters? Setting? Nope! The answer, if it wasn't already obvious, is point of view! Point of view is something that seems simple and easy but can be surprisingly tricky.

POV is essentially the means with which a narrative interacts with the audience. All writing has a point of view. It's the "surface" of the story. Who is telling the story? Am I inside the protagonist's head, am I beside them, am I above them? Is the focus on one character or many?

Each POV has rules, things that can and can't be done, and the job of an author is to determine which POV best complements the sort of story they want to tell. Most people are probably familiar with the three major points of view. I'll also touch on some subcategories that probably aren't as well known, or known but not always mentioned by name.

 **Dramatic/Objective Third Person**

Essentially all thought is stricken from the prose. Ideas can only be communicated through action, physical reaction, and dialogue. Shirley Jackson's _The Lottery_ is a famous example.

The concept behind this point of view is to be cold and distant. Far away. An observer with no opinion, or at least one not expressed outside a scene. Everything must be inferred by the actions and statements of characters, with no input from the narrator. It is completely neutral.

Example:

 _Misty sat beside the pool. Water lapped at her knees. She rested on her palms, staring up at the ceiling. Beads of sweat dripped down her temple._

 _"Where do we go from here?"_

 _Psyduck tilted his head. He moved forward, slipped, and tumbled into the pool. Water sprayed everywhere as he thrashed about._

 _After a moment, Misty sighed and leaned forward, fishing Psyduck out._

 **Third Person Limited**

Most contemporary fiction is written in third person limited. It's viewing the thoughts of one character, and one character only, and sticking with them for the duration of the scene/novel.

There can be multiple characters whose perspective I write from, but I can't switch perspectives mid-sentence. The scene has to conclude first, otherwise it's considered bad form. Another way to think about it is that I'm using dramatic third person _except_ for the point of view character.

A word of warning: waiting to introduce a new character's viewpoint has more potential to confuse the reader the longer it takes for them to appear. It's possible to bring in someone new even as late as a third of a way into the story, but it can also backfire.

Why is the limited third POV so popular? The answer is identification. I, the author, am providing a window for the reader to see into a specific character's mind - their quirks, dreams, backstory, motivation, flaws, and more. For a brief period of time, they embody that character. It's clear and engaging for a large majority of readers. Personal.

It's also easy to break POV here. For example, "Gary stared at his desk. There was so much paperwork. He ran a hand through his dark brown hair, bright brown eyes piercing as shadows lengthened around him."

I don't think about what color my hair is or what color my eyes are. A lot of fanfiction authors touch on this as a criticism, but generally don't articulate _why_ it's bad - it's a POV break (and often extraneous, boring detail, because Gary having brown hair tells me nothing about Gary the character).

As a writer I _think_ it's my responsibility to describe to readers what the character looks like. It's also why 'mirror scenes' tend to be popular. Trust me, though, nobody cares. It takes the reader out of the moment. I want them to be as close to the point of view character as possible, and breaking a reader's immersion is one of the worst mistakes a new writer can make. Physicality _can_ imply character, but that's a slightly different matter that I'll return to in another chapter.

Another example of a POV break:

"Gary glared at his grandfather, face flushed with anger. Professor Oak was angry too." The second sentence is the break. It flips from Gary's perspective to Oak's.

This, as with a lot of POV breaks, is rather subtle. Some might argue that it's not a violation because it's obvious that Oak is angry. There are absolutely grey areas for whether something is a POV break or not, and writer's discretion always plays a role.

But in this instance, Oak's anger can easily be shown through other means - clenched fists, raised voice, etc., and better reinforces the idea that the story is being viewed through Gary's eyes.

 **Third Person Omniscient**

Third person omniscient covers the thoughts of multiple characters, often within a single scene. The narrator is god. A lot of 18th century stories were written this way. Tolstoy, Dickens, Austen, the list goes on.

It's quieter, more controlled, sort of floating between characters. It's good for ensemble casts in particular. As with anything, it's important to establish early so that readers know what to expect.

This POV is rather tricky and I don't recommend it for new writers, as it's easy to overwhelm and overload the reader with information. There's an author between the character and the audience for all flavors of third person, even if the voice of the author is completely neutral, and omniscient can put up a wall that makes it difficult to connect with any character.

Example:

 _They watch the popplio slide down the tree. He's trying quite hard to get the coconut. What he'll do with the coconut is unimportant. First he needs to reach it._

 _Misty wants to help the poor dear. Gary just wants to take out his phone, film the popplio, and then upload the video onto social media. A pokémon doing a funny thing is guaranteed to go viral._

 **Second Person**

Second person is writing from the perspective of "you". It's not used all that often, and personally I find it rather gimmicky. You did this. You did that. No, _I_ didn't do this or that, the character did. But some authors who have done well with it are Jay McInerny, Lorrie Moore, and Terry Slessinger.

Sometimes writers will switch between third and second, creating the effect that there are 'two' voices. This POV is difficult and often weird, and should only be done by experienced authors interested in experimenting with different and/or new styles.

Example:

 _You receive a letter in the mail. No one slowbro mails anything anymore. It's from the_ _Pokémon League. That explains it. The neat, standardized font stares at you, as does the ornate, officious seal._

 _You contemplate the letter before hiding it under a pile of spam. Maybe later, right now you're conveniently busy with a rather important thing._

 **First Person**

First person utilizes "I". It's from the perspective of the characters themselves, rather than through the lens of a more distant narrator. This POV is special because the tone of the character is attached to the delivery. There's a lot more flexibility in how it can be delivered.

Hammet, Fitzgerald, and Twain are all authors who've used it. First person is particularly popular in mystery novels.

I, and quite a few others, tend to recommend this viewpoint to new writers for several reasons:

1\. It's easier to create an identifiable voice for the protagonist.

2\. It places limits on the writer, and limitations often breed creativity.

3\. It helps the audience better identify with the protagonist.

4\. It prevents point of view breaks.

It's important to keep in mind that third person sentences can still be used to describe what the character is observing. I rewrote a passage from _The Jungle Book_ to demonstrate what I mean:

"Father and Mother Wolf died, and I rolled a big boulder against the mouth of the cave, and cried the Death Song over them; Baloo grew very old and stiff, and even Bagheera, whose nerves were steel and whose muscles were iron, was a shade slower on the kill than he had been. Akela turned from gray to milky white with pure age; his ribs stuck out, and he walked as though he had been made of wood, and I killed for him."

That's not to say that it's a simple matter of flipping between first and third, it's more to make the point that not every sentence needs to start with "I". First person is essentially in the character's head - sentences are more likely to fragment and break down. A friend of mine had this point to make about some fanfiction in first person I've been working on:

"... characterization comes through what the pov character notices, sometimes the detail you put in when describing setting or characters comes off as kind of hollow. like [sic] the poetry and elegance she uses to describe for example the elder's house is at odds with her quips and nonchalance in dialogue."

Another question to ask is, 'Who's listening? Where is this being narrated from?' It's not something that might necessarily be answered, but it's still something to consider.

Example:

 _The coffee cup read, 'World's Number One Grandson' in obnoxious yellow and red font. I stared at it for a long time. When had I even gotten this? Probably from gramps. I shrugged and grabbed it anyway - Gary motherfuckin' Oak could make even the ugliest coffee cup look good._

 _I then opened the drawer, searching for my expertly hidden box of donuts. But all I found was a box filled with crumbs and betrayal, and a note that read, 'nice try. smell ya later'._

 _Dammit. This was why fratricide should be legal._

 **Epistolary (letter) and Journal**

A subdivision of first person. Nick Bantock's, _The Griffin and Sabine_ books are epistolary, _Dracula_ by Stoker, and of course everyone should know _The Diary of Anne Frank_.

It's important to remember that events have already taken place in these stories. That is to say, the narrator is discussing past events. It means whoever is writing this has already survived, which often lowers stakes and tension.

Quite often these are observers of the 'main character'. That is to say, the first person narrator isn't always the protagonist.

This is a POV that, again, I don't really recommend for new writers. But at the same time, I think it's a bit of an easier format compared to third omniscient or second person. So if someone is newer and wants to try a POV other than the standard ones, this is what I'd go with.

Example:

 _I threw a match today, because of how often I've been winning. "Skews the stats", they say. It's so stupid. The kid was such a sore winner, too._

 _I think I need a break._

 **How to Determine Point of View**

Some questions I'll ask myself when selecting a point of view:

What do I want to do to the reader?

Can the reader get what they need to know from inside a single narrator or not?

Will I need to describe some events where that narrator isn't present?

Will the story be as gripping if I'm telling it after the fact? Or if I jump between multiple points of view?

Whose story is this? Whose story am I telling?

 **Psychic Distance**

Psychic distance is a rather advanced concept that ties into point of view. John Gardner defines it as, "the distance the reader feels between himself [or herself] and the events in the story". He breaks it down into five levels of distance

"A young woman stepped into the forest."

At its farthest point, characters don't have names, they are figures in a landscape. This character isn't Misty to us, not yet, she's just 'a young woman'.

2\. "Misty Kasumi had never liked bugs."

Now we know her name, and have thus moved one step closer to her. But we're still a fair distance away from the character, it's quite formal.

3\. "In fact, Misty hated bugs."

Now we're on a first name basis, and we've changed the verb to better reflect the character's feelings. This middle ground is where much of a story will take place, distance wise.

4\. "Arceus, how she loathed those fucking bugs."

Now we've moved even closer due to pronouns and even stronger language.

5\. " _Creeping, crawling everywhere, too many legs, too many eyes, they wriggle beneath her skin and lay eggs, hatchlings bursting out through her skull._ "

This is the closest we can get - inside a character's head. The thoughts aren't being paraphrased.

Think of psychic distance as a camera. My words, and how close they bring me to the character or characters, acts as lens. Cinematography utilizes concepts such as close ups, wide shots, establishing shots, dutch angles, and more to better evoke a reaction or a feeling out of the audience. I can format my sentences in such a way to mimic this process.

Looking over the POVs just discussed, objective perspective places the reader the farthest from story events, while first person would be the closest. But often it can be like a camera on a dolly, moving in closer and then pulling away.

"Misty Kasumi hated bugs. (2) _Arceus_ , she thought, _they drive me crazy._ (5) The young woman had only ever had one bad experience with them. (1) But Misty never forgot it. (3)"

This is all over the place in terms psychic distance, moving in and out without any sort of rhyme or reason. It's like a yo-yo for the reader. Or we'll be using a characters name and their appropriate pronoun, and suddenly we get self-conscious of repetition and replace a pronoun with an epithet. Suddenly the reader is thrown way out of the story. Most of the time we should be hovering between 3 and 4, unless the change exists to make the reader feel something specific.

That's why it's important to control psychic distance, same as with controlling point of view. It better engages and directs the reader. But I wouldn't worry about this too much for new writers, and even experienced writers should be thinking about this sort of thing in the revision stages rather then the first draft.

For my story involving Gary and Misty, I've decided to use third person limited, because I want to shift between their respective viewpoints.

* * *

Well, that about covers everything involving POV. In the next chapter I'll discuss plot structures such as the hero's journey, the heroic quest, the three act structure, and freytag's pyramid. Hope this was helpful, and that everyone has a nice day.

 _References_

Daniel Schwabauer, _One Year Adventure Novel_

The Odyssey Workshop podcast featuring Gregory Frost, Robert Sawyer, and Rodman Philbrick

John Gardner, _The Art of Fiction: Notes on Craft for Young Writers_


	2. Story Structure

A/N: Sorry this took so long. I was busy with life and it also turned out much longer than anticipated.

Edit: Thinking it over, my wording here was confrontational. In that respect, I _am_ sorry, because my goal was never to provoke but only to inform. So let me try again:

I personally believe nonfiction has a right to exist on this site. All I want is to provide a platform for young writers in the pokemon fandom who might not otherwise be exposed to such ideas and elements. If the mods decide to take down my guide I won't object, but until that point is reached I'm going to continue plugging away. If you genuinely wish to continue discussing this with me, I would prefer you reach out to me via PM as opposed to through the review section.

One final point. Please don't respond to each other in my review section - this isn't AO3, the person isn't going to see it. Take it to PMs, I don't care about your personal grievances with other people on this site.

On the bright side, my commission was finished. Thanks, Wooled (also known as Woo), and a special shoutout to Will_1231 for recommending her to me. It's so cute!

* * *

 _"All great literature is one of two stories; a man goes on a journey or a stranger comes to town."_ \- Leo Tolstoy

Every year in high school English class, inevitably, my teacher would scribble a pyramid on the board with a bunch of terms I didn't care about. I had more important things to do, after all, like daydream fanfiction ideas that would never be written, haha.

Regardless, most people should be familiar with this pyramid, and it has a name: Freytag's Pyramid. It takes Aristotle's triangle, the three-act structure, and turns it into a five-act structure. I'll quickly go over both of them.

 **Aristotle's Unified Plot Structure**

(it's important to note that this was designed specifically for dramas - a structure for comedies may have existed but is now lost)

 _Protasis_ : The lowest left of the triangle represents the introduction.

 _Epitasis_ : The highest-middle of the triangle contains the crisis.

 _Catastrophe_ : The lowest-right of the triangle provides the resolution to the conflict.

Application: Gary and Misty meet in Alola on vacation - Gary and Misty must confront the Ultra Beast conflict and deal with their own personal hangups involving family - Gary and Misty resolve both the external (Ultra Beasts) and internal (personal resentment toward family) conflicts

 **Freytag's Pyramid**

 _Exposition or Introduction:_ Presents the setting, characters, and the basic conflict. Also establishes the mood or atmosphere of the story.

Example: Misty and Gary meet up in Alola. The mood is established as bright and lighthearted, much like the region itself, with some sad undertones.

 _Rising Action_ : The second arc where the basic conflict is brewing and the reader begins to feel the rising tension associated with this conflict. At this juncture, the basic conflict is further complicated by the introduction of obstacles frustrating the protagonist and other characters to reach their objectives. Secondary conflicts are probably coming from the antagonist, or adversaries, of lesser importance.

Example: Misty finds out Gary is there to learn more about Ultra Beasts that have been unleashed across Alola. They work together to capture the Ultra Beasts, foster a relationship, and uncover their personal issues.

 _Climax_ : The turning point and third arc effects a change either for the better or for the worse in the protagonist's (main character) situation. In a comedy, the protagonist positively faces his obstacles and there is a great chance that things will turn out well; but in a tragedy, the conflict of the protagonist is worsening which will ultimately turn disastrous for him.

Example: Misty and Gary come across the final Ultra Beast. Perhaps they lose, against, let's say Necrozma. Regardless, it puts them at odds, results in their insecurities being revealed and testing their relationship. Ultimately they overcome their issues, however, and resolve to try again.

 _Falling Action:_ A reversal happens in this fourth arc where the conflict between the protagonist and the antagonist (the character in opposition to the protagonist) is beginning to resolve. The protagonist either wins or loses to the antagonist. There are unexpected incidents which make the final outcome suspenseful. The falling action designates that the main action (the climax) is over and the story is heading towards the end.

Example: Misty and Gary resolve the conflict with Necrozma. Something unexpected happens - perhaps Team Aether appears. Perhaps Ash appears. Perhaps Misty's sisters appears. Regardless, I want to introduce some sort of surprise but also wrap up the main conflict.

 _Conclusion_ : The end of the story, sometimes called dénouement or resolution. If at the end of the story the protagonist achieves his goal, the story is a comedy; however, if the protagonist fails, the story is a tragedy. After conflicts are resolved, the characters resume their normal lives. The conclusion makes way for the catharsis - an event or events allowing the tension or anxiety to loosen.

Example: Misty and Gary have achieved their goals. Depending on the trajectory of their character development, they return home, or perhaps they decide to stay longer and fulfil the challenges. Regardless, it should tie up loose ends and provide a satisfying ending.

Now, before I continue on, I want to raise a few points. Not everyone agrees on using these structures for novels and short stories. Freytag's Pyramid and Aristotle's Unified Plot Structure were designed to analyze theatre. Elizabethan and Greek theatre, respectively.

James Bonnet writes, "The Greeks had no act structure in their plays. The plays had one act. The Romans had five acts. It's arbitrary. It appeared in plays because of the need to have intermissions. People can't sit for three hours in a theatre listening to an auditory experience without taking a break or going to the restroom. It appears in television shows because they want to have commercial breaks so they can sell something. None of which has anything to do with story...

"In my opinion, it makes much more sense when you're creating a story to be thinking in terms of the natural structure of the problem which has two main parts: the action that created it and the action that will resolve it. The action that creates the problem is called the inciting action and the action that resolves the problem is called the principle action. The threat, which is the driving force of the inciting action, be that a villain, an asteroid, a shark, etc., is the cause [sic] the problem. The anti-threat, which is the driving force of the principal action, be that a protagonist or a hero is the one who opposes the threat and solves the problem. Either of these actions will acquire the components of the classical structure if there is resistance - which is to say if there is sufficient resistance, there will be complications, a crisis, the need for a climactic action to resolve the crisis, and a resolution."

Rigidly following structure can also lead to formulaic writing. When a reader recognizes beats and patterns they've seen before in other works, it can break their suspension of disbelief. Suddenly they're not thinking about the plot and the characters, but instead, the threads the puppeteer, the author, are dangling overhead to move from point A to point B. Always remember that fiction, especially genre fiction, is less reality and more an illusion _to_ reality.

However, I'm going to talk about a variety of structures regardless. Why? Because I think it's helpful to at least be aware of their existence. Because even if I don't follow Freytag's Pyramid to the letter, it's a useful tool to help me better pace my project. Structure helps me organize my thoughts and ideas and provides me better clarity. Also, by understanding structure, I can figure out when and where to break convention.

Not everyone structures their stories. There's nothing wrong with that. But often even unstructured stories break down into a 'plot skeleton' because good writers intuitively understand what works (and even if they actively set out to avoid structure, every story can usually be divided into a beginning, middle, and end). And that's what a lot of this is about - analyzing why stories work and figuring out what works best for various types of people.

Jeffery Carver says, "Why do we care about structure? Think of it this way; you're running a race. How far would you get if you were a really powerful runner, but suddenly you didn't have any skeleton? You'd be flopping on the ground with your muscles not having anything to pull against… you'd be like a beached jellyfish. That, to me, is a story without structure: a beached jellyfish. It might be beautiful, it might be glistening in the sun, it might be really interesting - it might dangerous, but it's essentially inert. It doesn't take you anywhere."

He then goes on to say he received a lot of letters back from editors, talking about how many of the early things he wrote were nice mood pieces, but not necessarily stories. Personally, I think a 'plotless' story is possible, but his anecdote is still something to think about. Structure provides momentum and direction.

 **The Heroic Quest**

This is one of the easiest ways to look at a novel:

A character in a context with a problem tries to solve the problem and fails, tries to solve the problem and fails again, and then solves the problem. This is a story boiled down to its most basic elements. Character, setting, conflict, and conflict resolution. The heroic quest.

Interestingly enough, an idea doesn't always start with a character (although many do begin there). Tolkein was a linguist who wrote the Elvish language (context), and then created a problem (the one ring) so that he'd have a story to tell that involved said context. Satoshi Tajiri loved collecting bugs, and later in life, he translated that love into a game about collecting magical animals known as Pokémon.

It should also be noted that the problem should be difficult to solve. A problem that's easy to solve is inconsequential. It would be like if I went to the bank, withdrew some money, and then went home. That's not a story. Something needs to go wrong.

The reverse can also be true. John Gardner had a term known as 'dis-pollyanna syndrome'. Pollyanna-syndrome is a psychological term where people are more likely to remember positive memories than negative ones. Gardner uses it to mean stories where we know everything will turn out all right. Therefore, dis-pollyanna syndrome implies nothing will turn out right. Gardner argues this is just as intellectually dishonest as the opposite. If a story is nothing but rape and death and murder, people are going to lose interest, because they're not given anything to care about.

 _A Song of Ice and Fire_ is well known due to terrible things happening to the characters, but it still gives us characters to care about, such as Tyrion and Ned and Jon. And even though characters often fail, they also often succeed, such as when Jon stops others on the wall from bullying his friends, or when Tyrion successfully defends King's Landing.

Shadow of Antioch, a good friend of mine, is writing a story called _Rebirth_ with a very dark tone. But the two central protagonists are still fundamentally good people (well, Pokémon), giving us something to latch onto no matter how horrible the surrounding events get. Make sure the audience has something or someone to care about.

 **The Hero's Journey**

This is a common template, developed by anthropologist Edward Burnett Taylor, of a broad category of tales involving a hero who goes on an adventure, and in a decisive crisis wins a victory, and then comes home changed or transformed. It's particularly prevalent in fantasy and fairytales. There are seventeen stages, although not all stages may necessarily be used. One of the most notable modern stories that employ this structure is _Star Wars_.

 **Departure**

1\. The call to adventure

2\. Refusal of the call

3\. Supernatural aide

4\. Crossing the threshold

5\. Belly of the whale

 **Initiation**

6\. The road of trials

7\. The meeting with the goddess

8\. Woman as Temptress

9\. Atonement with the father

10\. Apotheosis

11\. The ultimate boon

 **Return**

12\. Refusal of the return

13\. The magic flight

14\. Rescue from without

15\. The crossing of the return threshold

16\. Master of two worlds

17\. Freedom to live

Okay, there's a lot to unpack here. Let's summarize.

 **Departure** is the beginning point, where the protagonist is called upon to achieve some sort of goal. The idea behind them refusing the call is that it illuminates personality - they might say no because of duty, or insecurity, or fear of the unknown, whatever. They do, eventually, answer the call, because if they didn't there would be no story. It's at this point they meet their mentor, who often provides supernatural aide, and adventures into a mysterious and dangerous realm, where the rules and limits are unknown. The 'belly of the whale' basically means they're willing to undergo changes. Think Luke after Uncle Owen dies, and his strengthened resolve to train under Ben and defeat the Empire.

 **Initiation** is the middle part of the story, with the series of challenges the protagonist overcomes. 'Woman as temptress' doesn't literally mean a woman, it just means something of a pleasurable nature trying to lead the protagonist astray. In a lot of stories, the hero is tempted from his spiritual journey by lust, which is why they use that particular metaphor. Same with the 'atonement with the father', it's about confronting whatever holds the ultimate power in a person's life, and in a lot of cases that's a father figure - it could be alcohol, a significant other, a boss, etc., etc. Apotheosis, called the epiphany in short stories by Joyce, is the moment of realization and understanding. It's the turning point that lets them achieve the ultimate boon, aka the main goal of the story.

 **Return** is all about, well, the return. The hero must return to their ordinary life and integrate their knowledge with everyday society. Sometimes they must escape back, sometimes they're reluctant to leave. But inevitably they return home.

Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Explorers of Sky can easily fall under the Hero's Journey. Even more interestingly, we could start right at the twist where they get pulled into the future, and everything would still function coherently. This might be an explanation for why some criticize the game's slow start. Regardless, when the partner asks the MC to join their exploration team, we've technically had the call to action (and saying no could be considered a refusal of the call). Them getting kidnapped to the future could be considered 'crossing the threshold' and entering the 'belly of the whale'. There are a series of trials that culminate in journeying to the Hidden Land, where they must overcome Dusknoir and the MC must face the fact that he will disappear to save the world. They accept their fate, the apotheosis, and disappear (only to return later, which, while perhaps a bit of a stretch, could be considered the 'master of both worlds').

 **Eastern Story Structures**

One of the major takeaways when it comes to western story structure is that a lot of it revolves around conflict. But is it possible to write a story without conflict? According to the east, yes, absolutely!

 **Jo, Ha, Kyu**

 _"Every phenomenon in the universe develops itself through a certain progression. Even the cry of a bird and the noise of an insect follow this progression. It is called Jo, Ha, Kyu."_ \- Motokiyo Zeami

Once again, this structure was originally designed for theatre. Keep that in mind if it sounds interesting. I cannot stress enough how important it is to know the differences between mediums and what does and does not translate. Considering fanfiction, in particular, is often transferring a visual and/or interactive medium into a written format, always, always, always remember this.

Many of the conventions of Japanese theatre are actually based on accurate observation of natural patterns. One of these patterns is a rhythmic structure called Jo, Ha, Kyu. It starts slowly, then gradually and smoothly accelerate towards a very fast peak. After the peak, there is usually a pause and then a recommencement of the acceleration cycle - a new Jo Ha Kyu.

 _Jo_ : A beginning or opening

 _Ha_ : A break or development

 _Kyu_ : A sense of 'speed' or 'climax'

It differs from the West's concept of 'beginning, middle, and end' because it's a smooth acceleration as opposed to a series of steps. Dialogue and action will also have a rhythm to it (John Gardner also talks a lot about sentences and paragraphs having a 'rhythm' - but I'll cover more of that in the section regarding flow), starting at a certain speed and ending at a slightly faster rhythm.

The degree of acceleration will vary; sometimes it's quite clear to the audience, sometimes the shift in tempo is very slight, but it's always there. The sense of forward momentum is never absent. If we view the previous structures as a pyramid and a triangle, a shape that would fit Jo Ha Kyu would be the rolling wave. This might have a useful application for longer running stories that utilize arcs because they're self-contained narratives within a single story.

 ** _Kishōtenketsu_**

Kishōtenketsu is a four-act structure often found in Japanese and Chinese storytelling. Many horror stories and even, funnily enough, Nintendo's Super Mario employs this concept.

 _Introduction_ (起): The topic, setting, and characters are all established.

 _Development_ (承): Information is further clarified and elaborated upon.

 _Twist_ (転): Something happens that changes the way information is perceived.

 _Resolution_ (結): The first two sections must be reconciled with the shocking revelation of the third.

This is the type of structure that I could also see working wonderfully for a slice-of-life story, or a cute, fluffy, romantic one-shot.

Stilleatingoranges, referencing a four-panel comic of someone getting a bottle of soda and giving it to a friend/father figure, says, "The resulting plot–and it is a plot–contains no conflict. No problem impedes the protagonist; nothing is pitted against anything else. Despite this, the twist in panel three imparts a dynamism –a chaos, perhaps– that keeps the comic from depicting merely a series of events. Panel four reinstates order by showing us how the first two panels connect to the third, which allows for a satisfactory ending without the need for a quasi-gladiatorial victory. It could be said that the last panel unifies the first three."

As an example, I'll go back to my Misty and Gary story. Ditch the Ultra Beasts. Just have the two of them in Alola spending time together. And at the midway point, the twist is that they were dating all along. Twists exist in all forms of media, western or eastern - the difference is that the twist here isn't rooted in the conflict between the characters or the plot.

 **Other Miscellaneous Forms of Structure**

There are, of course, a variety of other ways to structure a story.

Trey Parker and Matt Stone of South Park have a simpler way of looking at it. Many writers make the mistake of writing a story as 'and then this happened, and then this happened, and then this happened', when instead it should be, 'and then this happened but this happened, therefore, this happened'.

I'll look at the first episode of the Pokémon anime as an example:

Ash Ketchum lives in a world inhabited by Pokémon. It's the day he receives his starter, **but** he oversleeps. **Therefore** , no starters left. **Therefore,** he gets Pikachu instead, **but** Pikachu won't listen to him. **Therefore** , Ash angers a flock of Spearow. Ash tries to protect Pikachu **but** injuries himself in the process, **therefore** Pikachu defeats the flock of Spearow.

In contrast with this:

Ash Ketchum lives in a world inhabited by Pokémon. He wakes up and then gets his starter, and then leaves town, and then walks to Viridian City.

See the difference? It's a useful way to denote cause and effect.

There are a lot of complaints about the Pokémon anime and for good reason. But this first episode is solid from a structural perspective.

Douglas Goetsch discusses a Tibetan Buddhist teaching known as the three poisons - passion, aggression, and ignorance - three foundational emotions that underlie all others. A comparison is drawn to three primary colors, combining for all other colors in the spectrum.

It's certainly possible to structure a story off a philosophical conceit. Schools of thought such a Platonism, Stoicism, Existentialism, Nietzscheism, and more are all the basis for a variety of works.

 _The Musical Novel: Imitation of Musical Structure, Performance, and Reception in Contemporary Fiction_ by Emily Petermann defines genre as form, borrowing musical techniques such as rhythm, timbre, jazz riffs, call and response, leitmotifs, themes and variations, symphonies, and albums.

Milan Kundera studied classical music in his youth. His book, _Art of the Novel_ , also connects writing with music. Just looking at, say, the sonata form, and how it consists of three main structures (an exposition, a development, and a recapitulation), and it's easy to see where the translation can begin. It _is_ possible but it's something that needs to be handled with thought and care.

 **Conclusion and Application**

So. I've now covered a variety of potential story structures. As a word of warning, please, please, please do not just pick a structure because it sounds different or unique from what everyone else is doing. I pick a structure because it's a useful tool that will help me accomplish whatever it is I'm setting out to achieve, and I shouldn't be afraid to break away from it if it's truly curbing my creativity.

My other warning is this - always remember the audience. If I'm going to write an anachronistic, Avante Garde story on free will, based off the doctrine of Duns Scotus, using Pokémon in a series of dialogues representing abstract symbols, chances are I'll have an audience of one (aka my mom).

If someone doesn't care about their audience and are just using fanfiction as a means to experiment and do whatever the hell they feel like, then by all means, experiment away. They just shouldn't be mad if/when nobody reads it.

It's worth mentioning that once someone has gained a following, they have a little more wiggle room to write something without losing said audience. For example, once Tolkien wrote _The Lord of the Rings_ , he was able to publish the _Silmarillion_. Anyone who's read it will know it's rather dry, but because Tolkien got people interested in the world of Middle Earth, he was able to publish a book that was essentially nothing but lore about a fantasy world that doesn't actually exist.

Now, I'm going to reel it back a bit. Simplify things, because that's generally how I prefer to operate. I set a goal for myself in the previous chapter to write an outline for an adventure/romance novel involving Gary and Misty.

One of my favorite forms of structure comes from Daniel Schwabauer, because it's simple, flexible, and, best of all, was specifically designed for writing adventure novels. It utilizes concepts from the heroic quest and breaks down into two parts, a situation and a question. Then it's divided further into three parts.

The situation is made up of:

The way things are (context)

Someone to care about (the hero)

Something to want (the story goal)

The question is made up of:

Something to dread (the villain)

Something to suffer (the price paid)

Something to learn (the theme)

Okay. Now I'll fill this bad boy out. Feel free to follow along.

 **The Way Things Are**

Misty needs a vacation, sick and tired of her job. She heads over to Alola for a month, and while there, meets up with Gary Oak, who's been spending time with Samson Oak, his grandfather's cousin. They're all chilling, having a good time, when Misty learns that Gary is there to study the strange, recent appearance of creatures known as Ultra Beasts.

 **Someone to Care About**

I want my heroes to be people the audience cares about. That doesn't necessarily mean they'll like them, but what it does mean is that they have an emotional connection with the protagonists and want to find out what happens to them. I plan on discussing characters more in-depth in the next chapter, but in short, I want my characters to have external and internal motivations that are understandable to the audience. Misty and Gary both have strengths and weaknesses, they have desires, and they have obstacles they must overcome.

Sometimes what draws an audience are not the characters but the setting - Alola is a bright, colorful, fun place to be filled with cool fantasy creatures, and that alone might be enough to grab and hold someone's attention.

 **Something to Want**

The goal of the story. One bit of advice I find useful is that the main goal can be summed up in a single photograph. The Death Star being blown up in _Star Wars_. The One Ring being dropped in Mount Doom.

This provides us the major motivation for the characters. It doesn't necessarily have to be the only motivation, but it's a place to start. Gary and Misty want to find and stop the Ultra Beasts from hurting other people. I consider this an external motivation, and the plot boiled down to its simplest element.

Internal motivation comes from the characters personal needs. Luke is motivated to stop Darth Vader. Frodo is motivated to protect those he loves. An internal motivation may not necessarily jive with the external motivation. Setting the internal and external motivation in opposition to each other creates organic stakes and tension. Gary and Misty are working to find the Ultra Beasts, but they don't want to return home, because it's a source of unhappiness for them. Therefore, they're reluctant to finish finding the Ultra Beasts, because then they'll have no reason to stay in Alola. But, again, that's a discussion I plan to continue in the chapter on characters.

 **Something to Dread**

I want my audience to feel compelled to continue reading. We want them to feel like characters can fail, be curious to find out what happens next, be caught up in suspense. It motivates them to continue reading.

The Ultra Beasts should be a legitimate threat for Gary and Misty to handle. We also want the obstacles they face to naturally progress. If we started with the Ultra Necrozma fight and ended with a battle against a Bidoof, well, that would be rather anticlimactic. Or, perhaps the Ultra Beasts are not the true threat, and in a twist, it's instead, I dunno, the league, or Team Aether. Regardless, there's an expectation that something is set up to be a threat to our protagonists, and we, the author, should pay it off at some point or another.

It could also revolve around the internal motivation. Perhaps, a la _Shadow of the Colossus_ , capturing the Ultra Beasts leads to a slow degradation of Gary and Misty's morality. Or perhaps their reluctance to return home leads to them ignoring the Ultra Beast threat, resulting in people getting hurt. An unspoken promise between the reader and the writer, at least for the adventure genre, is that _bad things are going to happen_. It's important that I find a way to keep that promise.

One final point: a great villain can save an otherwise bland story. People love a good villain. _Sleeping Beauty_ is nothing without Maleficent. Spike was so effective in _Buffy_ that he wound up joining the main cast when originally he was more of a one-and-done type villain. The best villains inspire emotion and force the protagonists to react to them in interesting ways.

 **Something to Suffer**

As we mentioned before, it's important that the goal be difficult to achieve. Our characters should go through trials and tribulations to achieve their goal (this is not exactly the same thing as something to dread - dread ties into suspense, payoff, and tension, while suffering is more about the actual event. Put another way, one is about how we feel, while the other is about what is actually happening).

Suffering is put into two categories: emotional suffering and physical suffering. The Ultra Beasts are strong and elusive - there's one way to create physical suffering. Gary and Misty have to brave the elements and put both themselves and their Pokémon in danger to stop the Ultra Beasts.

Both Misty and Gary are known to have rather obnoxious personalities at times, so perhaps they clash, putting a strain on their friendship/potential relationship. That's emotional suffering. Perhaps the fights with the Ultra Beasts hurts their Pokémon badly, emotionally distancing the Pokémon from their trainers. Suffering shouldn't be random. It should feed into the plot, into the character's flaws and motivations. Always play fair with the audience - show them the real cancer before showing them the cure.

 **Something to Learn**

Ah, theme. People tend to talk in circles around it.

I'm going to ignore the conventional definition of theme and go with a simpler concept. For my purpose here, a theme is a general statement about some larger truth.

 **Theme #1** : Happiness is important.

 **Theme #2** : Personal stagnation is bad.

Now let's turn those into specific premises. Right now they don't really hint at any sort of conflict or juxtaposition.

 **Premise #1** : Happiness is important even in the most difficult circumstances.

 **Premise #2** : Personal stagnation due to familial obligation results in entropy and resentment.

Now we have the seeds of conflict in place. Think of a theme as something similar to the scientific method - I want to test it, again and again, to try and prove it wrong. And in doing so, I show my audience without directly explaining it to them, why my premise is correct.

To be honest, I had a bit of a difficult time coming up with a theme for this story concept (I actually went back and edited it after thinking it over while at work, and like it a lot more). That's normal. Most writers don't really think about their theme, except maybe in the most abstract terms, until perhaps the end of their story. This is still the planning stage, and the theme may very well change because I intended the structure to be flexible. But it's important to imbue some sort of meaning into the narrative, some sort of revelation for the characters to have, or else it's going to feel hollow and empty.

In summary, structure is a useful tool. I should use the best tools to write the best version of a story I'm interested in telling. I hope, if there's any takeaway from all of this, that's the one. I'm not trying to tell anyone what to do, I'm just trying to lay everything out so people have the proper equipment to succeed at whatever they're attempting, whether it be a full-fledged story, or a mood piece, or a one-shot, or, hell, even smut. At the end of the day, if someone manages to evoke the emotional reaction they want out of their audience, they've succeeded as an author in my mind.

* * *

 _References_

Daniel Schwabauer, _One Year Adventure Novel_

The Odyssey Podcast featuring Elizabeth Bear, Michael A. Burstein, Jeffery Carver, and Melanie Tem and Steve Rasnic Tem

The Writing University Podcast featuring Douglas Goetsch

John Gardner, _The Art of Fiction: Notes on Craft for Young Writers_

 _The Significance of Plot Without Conflict_ from stilleatingorange's tumblr

 _What's Wrong with the Three Act Structure?_ by James Bonnet

 _The Notion of Jo, Ha, Kyu_ from _The Invisible Actor_ by Yoshi Oida and Lorna Marshall

 _The Skeletal Structure of Japanese Horror_ by Rudy Barret


End file.
